BBC: Outrage at Syrian rebel shown 'eating soldier's heart'

[Poll_Blind]

Outrage at Syrian rebel shown 'eating soldier's heart'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22519770

A video which appears to show a Syrian rebel taking a bite from the heart of a dead soldier has brought strong condemnation.

US-based Human Rights Watch identified the rebel as Abu Sakkar, a well-known insurgent from the city of Homs, and said his actions were a war crime.

The main Syrian opposition coalition said he would be put on trial.

The video, which cannot be independently authenticated, seems to show him cutting out the heart.

"I swear to God we will eat your hearts and your livers, you soldiers of Bashar the dog," the man says referring to President Bashar al-Assad as he stands over the soldier's corpse.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) says Abu Sakkar is the leader of a group called the Independent Omar al-Farouq Brigade.

"The mutilation of the bodies of enemies is a war crime. But the even more serious issue is the very rapid descent into sectarian rhetoric and violence," HRW's Peter Bouckaert told Reuters news agency.

Stay classy, y'all!

PB

[BainsBane]

1. Wow, I wasn't aware of this being done since the Aztecs

carried out the practice.

[magellan]

2. ...

And our government wants to support these people??? GOOD GOD.

[pinboy3niner]

12. "The main Syrian opposition coalition said he would be put on trial."

Generalizing from this individual's atrocious behavior to broad-brush all of the diverse opposition groups would be a mistake.

[magellan]

15. The point is we don't know who the fuck we're dealing with

And I'm not about to take the CIA's word for it that the people our government supports are any better than this individual, or Assad. It's past time we burned our dance card.

[pinboy3niner]

16. No, the point is that one individual's behavior is being used as broad-brush propaganda. nt

[magellan]

17. That's your opinion

And it overlooks the fact that even without this tale there are some very unsavory characters among the rebels.

[pampango]

18. "I'm not about to take the CIA's word for it that the people our government supports are any better

than this individual..."

Is that supposed to mean that you think everyone who opposes Assad is a cannibalistic war criminal/terrorist?

The fact is that Assad is a nasty piece of work who will destroy Syria in order to remain in power. The fact is that there are many Syrians who do not want to live under a dictator or a theocracy (and are not cannibals). The fact is that the nasty side of the opposition gains strength as the civil war goes on. The fact is that there is little we can do about any of this other than provide aid to refugees - anything else will make a terrible situation for the Syrian people even worse.

Those are the facts on which we should base our policy - which should be non-intervention. What we should not do is start with a policy that we want - non-intervention - and then create "facts" (both sides are equally bad and anyone who opposes Assad is a terrorist/cannibal) that support our desired policy. That's a republican approach to policy-making. Want to invade Iraq - create the necessary 'facts'; want to cut taxes for the rich - create the necessary 'facts'; don't like EPA or the existence of global warming, create the necessary 'facts', etc., etc., etc.

I get the sense that Obama is living in a 'fact-based' world and trying to figure out what to do in Syria. McCain and other republicans live in a 'fact-free' world (a world crowded with republicans on a variety of issues) where they know the policy they want - send in the bombers - and will create the 'facts' they need to achieve their policy. I disagree with their policy because I think the facts do not support it. We should not adopt the republican approach to policy-making in which we would adopt a policy then go searching for 'facts' that support it.

[magellan]

19. No, it means precisely what I said. n/t

[David__77]

21. I'm hopeful Obama has already "figured out what to do."

And that is first and foremost, stay out. Second, attempt to politically drive a wedge in the opposition between the salafists and the rest, thereby weakening the military drive of the extremists. Third, make contingency planning for if the extremists flee Syria and potentially endanger U.S. security.

[pampango]

22. Those are very good recommendations, David__77. n/t

[jakeXT]

38. pimping himself to his money masters

Their brand image, many rebels say, can sometimes make or break a deal with rich, private donors in the Gulf or the ultraconservative Sunni Muslim clerics pouring money into the Syrian rebellion.

It's not uncommon to see bearded, robed sheiks mingling with Syrian rebels in some of the fancier hotels of Antakya, the southern Turkish city that has served as something of a rear base for Syrian rebels and activists.

These benefactors sometimes ask to see YouTube proof of the rebels' military prowess. And the fancier the video, rebels say, the better.

For other brigades, it's also a matter of hearts and minds. Some hope their brand image - from their logo to responsiveness on Twitter - can help them win the favour of dissident Syrians who have grown critical of an armed rebellion they see as having strayed from the goals of a peaceful uprising.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/wall-street-journal/for-syrian-rebels-brand-rules-fight-for-hearts-minds-and-cash/story-fnay3ubk-1226634925153

[leveymg]

51. I'll never think of the term "hearts & minds" the same way again.

Last edited Wed May 15, 2013, 06:01 AM - Edit history (1)

Thanks a whole lot, Jake.

[Scootaloo]

52. More to the point... Out government wants to reduce Syria to mad anarchy

We can't control Assad, and a democracy is the worst thing any western power can envision in the middle east, so this is the "middle" solution; total chaos and constant warfare. Our way of putting them 'on ice' until we can find a pliable dictator to take over for our interests.

To paraphrase a misquote, this is our way of wiping them off the map.

[chollybocker]

3. He sounds nice.

[XVI_Eyes]

5. Sounds like Liberia all over again

General buck naked and his Tupac army.

[Cali_Democrat]

6. I've seen some other crazy stuff from Syria on websites I will not name.

That place has become a disaster.

[David__77]

7. Assad is like Bush, but the opposition are far, far worse.

Assad is a secular autocrat having little regard for the right of the people to rule society. His economic policy and ruling style is precisely right-wing: pro-capitalist, neoliberal- a program for modernization that leaves the people behind.

It is little wonder that the poorest Syrians left out have joined an insurgency with a messianic message of liberation. It is like the peasant wars of olden times. But it is not progressive. It is under barbaric, terrorist leadership that will lead those poor people to doom and devastation.

[joshcryer]

10. I'm glad we can like HWR again.

edit: Tracked down the video, the desperation of this dude is pathetic beyond belief. I suspect a breakdown in the ranks or him trying to gain credibility as some kind of warrior. (Which will no doubt backfire.)

Note: the video is heavily blurred but it leaves little to the imagination, so it's not recommended. Just felt like a sad little man to me.

[GCP]

13. Sad little man my ass

For cripes sake don't show any sympathy for this psychopathy.

[joshcryer]

36. None intended.

I think you can find something pathetic while having disgust with it.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

23. Assad is almost completely unlike Bush.

I know you think the American right is the Ultimate Epitome of Evil, but it really, really isn't.

[David__77]

43. I didn't say either was "Ultimate Epitome of Evil."

I said that they were similar in their politics and ideology. I think this is the case. Assad is at a disadvantage, because he lacks all of the smart bombs and gizmos to which Bush had access.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

55. Is it Assad or Bush (or both) that you know virtually nothing about?

Assad is a spectacularly repressive hereditary military dictator with a heavily statist economic policy, who maintains power by ensuring the continuing control of the Alawite minority in Syria.

Bush was a leader brought to power, and *removed* from power, by the the democratic process, whose record on human rights was poor by Western standards but much better than that of most non-Western leaders, and whose economics were based around drowning the government in a bathtub.

[Megalo_Man]

8. Kali maaa

Kali maaa shakti dai

[Cali_Democrat]

25. LOL

[Quantess]

9. Mutilation of bodies is a war crime...

Oh well in that case, that's the last straw!!1

Seems like fickle reasoning that says that babies' and young children's genitalia should be cut up, but cutting up a corpse is just horrific. To my estimation, dead is dead, and bombs do a pretty effective job of "mutilating" bodies, too. That's just my off-topic opinion. Humans can be pretty weird.

[pinboy3niner]

14. WTF?

An individual's personal desecration of the dead is a FAR different matter from the horrific effects of bombs.

Dead may be dead, but how we treat the remains of the dead is very important and says a lot about our regard for the living.

[Orrex]

35. Just so I understand you...

It's ok use bombs to make them dead, but once we've made them dead we need to respect them?

how we treat the remains of the dead is very important and says a lot about our regard for the living.

Maybe, but how we treat the living says a lot more about our regard for the living.

[pinboy3niner]

41. "It's ok use bombs to make them dead..."

You know that I didn't say that.

You may or may not also know that I've been seriously wounded in war and I'm not a big fan of modern military weapons.

But yes, apart from all of that, I believe how we treat the remains of our dead-- in war or peace--is important. Our respect for the dead IS a sign of our respect for the living.

[Orrex]

57. Well...

My point is that it's simply obscene to claim that we honor the living by respecting the dead if we're the ones who are making them dead in the first place.

[Union Scribe]

44. Off-topic indeed. nt

[malaise]

11. Keep on arming them and make them the new ally

[sibelian]

20. Both sides of this conflict do seem to be pretty awful.

I've been following various strands of the narrative via Youtube. Yech. Neither side comes out well. Torture carnival.

[Blaukraut]

24. There is always a small number of deviants who use any available excuse to act on their impulses

Wars and conflicts are the perfect vehicle for such individuals.

[KingFlorez]

26. In this situation, there are no decent parties

The right-wing has gone on and on for months about how the rebels need support and that the US should give it. There is a reason that the administration has been very careful about what it does regarding Syria.

[Marrah_G]

27. ........

KEEP OUR MEN AND WOMEN OUT OF THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[phantom power]

28. fomenting outrage over the enemy's atrocities is the oldest warmonger trick in the book

[Comrade Grumpy]

29. Maybe the dude shouldn't have had himself filmed eating a heart.

[HiPointDem]

30. agreed, but do you say the same when its the gov't in the spotlight?

[phantom power]

32. I think I'm not following -- which government and whose spotlight?

[HiPointDem]

34. In this case, assad's gov't. I agree this instance has the smell of propaganda. But so do

many of the anti-assad cases.

[eissa]

31. Let's arm these guys!

Seriously, what could go wrong?!

[David__77]

45. "Arms" takes on a different meaning what with the cannibalism.

"Arm" the rebels?

[bike man]

33. Throw some more foreign aid dollars at them. They've only been given a few hundred million so far,

plus the couple of hundred million given to Jordan to ease their expenses with refugees.

[pampango]

39. Helping the refugees from this mess is about the only GOOD thing that we can do to help

Syrian people. We could leave aid that up to the Europeans and Canadians but I do not know why we should.

[bike man]

40. There are people right here in the US who could use help. There is no money for them,

but hundreds of millions of dollars for others?

There MUST be something wrong with this picture.

[pampango]

42. What's wrong with the picture is the "US"-good, "THEM"-bad aspect.

Given that the US spends less of its budget on foreign aid than any other developed country and spend as much as the next 10 countries combined for the military, funds for our needy do not have to come at the expense of Syrian refugees.

[bike man]

50. What other countries do or do not is not the issue. What IS the issue, funds for refugees and other

interests (including the foreign aid to Israel that no doubt helped pay for the $170K airplane seat) are in fact funds that could assist homeless, jobless, medicineless (not really a word) folks here in the US.

[pampango]

54. What liberals do here and in other countries IS the issue. We all know that conservatives

oppose foreign aid (other than the military variety) and the more conservative they are the more they oppose foreign aid. It is liberals in the world that do not pit their own poor against the poor in other parts of the world. The more progressive societies in Europe, Canada and Australia spend a much larger share of their budgets on foreign aid than do conservative ones who are more concerned with 'looking out for number 1'.

Americans who identify with the Tea Party movement are more likely than all other Americans to support reductions in foreign aid and the budget of the U.S. State Department. But they are less likely to back trimming military spending and anti-terrorism efforts. This may be because Tea Party sympathizers are generally more hawkish than their fellow countrymen.

In particular, Tea Party sympathizers would like to see a cut back in aspects of American soft power. More than eight-in-ten would decrease aid to the world’s needy, compared with 43 percent of all other Americans who support such economizing.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/03/04/will-budget-cuts-isolationism/

As FDR said in his 1945 inaugural address:

We have learned that we cannot live alone, at peace; that our own well-being is dependent on the well-being of other nations far away. We have learned that we must live as men, not as ostriches, nor as dogs in the manger.

We have learned to be citizens of the world, members of the human community.

We have learned the simple truth, as Emerson said, that "The only way to have a friend is to be one."

We can gain no lasting peace if we approach it with suspicion and mistrust or with fear. We can gain it only if we proceed with the understanding, the confidence, and the courage which flow from conviction.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/fdr-fourth-inaugural/

[LittleBlue]

37. Well, I see this is going as planned

Can't wait for these groups to turn their arms against us.

[jessie04]

48. If anyone cares its on you tube...and its past disgusting.

I shudder at the thought of someone like this coming to power.

The last thing we should do is get involved with either side.

[Riftaxe]

53. Regardless of who wins, the losers

will be the Syrian people. Arming the rebels is just as insane as arming Assad and his cronies.

[jambo101]

56. I cant believe some are thinking we should get involved

This level of barbarism and hate really needs to sort itself out without our intervention, we'll deal with whoever comes out the victor.

[Victor_c3]

58. War brings out the worst in people

As appalled as I am, this doesn't at all surprise me. Even in our "moral" society our Soldiers are found urinating on and posing with enemy dead like they were hunting trophies.

[Bo]

59. Syria will be no better than Egypt or Libya.

Rebels have the mentality of a slug

[bobclark86]

60. Hey, but I wanted to play GOP now...

and just give them ALL THE GUNZ!!!

Because that worked soo well in Libya, as the same GOPers keep reminding us...